Warren gets out of bed in the early hours for the first time and with a choice of 2 murder sites to check out he goes straight to see a piece of chalked writing in a doorway?
As soon as the police removed the piece of apron how could any of the locals (i.e. Jews) be expected to connect the writing with the Murders? It's hard to believe that there was ever a real chance of some kind of riot even IF the message was, in their eyes, linked to the murder (i.e. an accusation against the Jews). But if the cloth had been taken away a policeman guarding the message could have been given any kind of cover story for the public as why he was there ( for eg. 'I've been told to watch for suspicious behaviour, now move along.'). I recall Bruce Robinson saying something like 'if they could seal off Mitre Square, which has 3 exits, and stop anyone going in or out, surely it wouldn't have been beyond the Met to seal off a doorway in an east end backstreet?'
HS

Wouldn't want anyone to recognize the handwriting.
Seriously doubt Jack's identity was the enormous secret most people today think it to be.
WE Gladstone's letter to The Times was interesting. Especially when you know who put him up to it.

I need to refresh my memory. Is Gladstones letter to the Times amongst the press reports on here? If you could give me the date I'll have a look.

Until I reignited my interest in the case and joined the casebook I hadn't previously heard the suggestion that Eddowes dropped that piece of cloth herself? Bruce Robinson suggested that Jack used the cloth to carry away the womb and kidney but reading the report that you posted earlier it said that the cloth was only wet at the corner. Could it be that it was badly stained (as it would be if used to carry away body parts) but it had dried apart from one corner? If it was used to carry away body parts it means that Jack went back to where he lived, stashed the parts, then went back out just to dump the cloth. Obviously there was no need to take such a risk as he could have burned it in the grate or dumped it next day. Therefore he had a reason for putting it specifically where he did.
HS

reading the report that you posted earlier it said that the cloth was only wet at the corner. Could it be that it was badly stained (as it would be if used to carry away body parts) but it had dried apart from one corner?

One thing to consider with the corners of aprons is that they're the bits that hang closest to the ground; in this case, of course, the apron-wearer was lying dead on her back, so that the corner of the apron would have lain very close to, if not touching the pavement. With that in mind, this particular part of the apron could have dangled into, and soaked up, some of the blood pooling around - or inside - Eddowes' body whilst the killer was engaged in his eviscerations at Mitre Square.

I need to refresh my memory. Is Gladstones letter to the Times amongst the press reports on here? If you could give me the date I'll have a look.

Until I reignited my interest in the case and joined the casebook I hadn't previously heard the suggestion that Eddowes dropped that piece of cloth herself? Bruce Robinson suggested that Jack used the cloth to carry away the womb and kidney but reading the report that you posted earlier it said that the cloth was only wet at the corner. Could it be that it was badly stained (as it would be if used to carry away body parts) but it had dried apart from one corner? If it was used to carry away body parts it means that Jack went back to where he lived, stashed the parts, then went back out just to dump the cloth. Obviously there was no need to take such a risk as he could have burned it in the grate or dumped it next day. Therefore he had a reason for putting it specifically where he did.
HS

Not been able to locate WEG's letter to The Times explaining Jack was really doing research that would benefit Humanity.
It'll be somewhere in the posts,possibly not among the press reports.
WEG was on a VIP board/club with someone very close to Jack. Gull.

Reckon Jack had a bolthole away from his family. Cough,cough

Apron possibly ripped from a top corner to a bottom one.
At least one recent thread on whether it had a bib or not

One thing to consider with the corners of aprons is that they're the bits that hang closest to the ground; in this case, of course, the apron-wearer was lying dead on her back, so that the corner of the apron would have lain very close to, if not touching the pavement. With that in mind, this particular part of the apron could have dangled into, and soaked up, some of the blood pooling around - or inside - Eddowes' body whilst the killer was engaged in his eviscerations at Mitre Square.

That's a fair point. The part of this particular episode that's vital for me is: why did Jack take the apron away and why he left it where he did?
My thinking has always run along the lines of : a) to clean his knife-no chance, he would have cleaned it in situ. b) to clean his hands-unlikely because,again, he could have done that in situ c) as a souvenir-unlikely because he discarded it. d) to carry away body parts-possible, the parts were missing, although would there have been enough blood to have seeped through. Maybe he wrapped them and put them in a bag? or e) he took it specifically as a pointer to the message. I'd never considered the idea that Eddowes 'could' have dropped it there herself. I'm unsure about that one.
Options e) obviously says the message was written by Jack and d) implies it as Jack would have taken the 'bundle' home and then gone straight back out (when there was no immediate need to be rid of it and even worse no need to head straight back into an area that he knew would have a heavy police presence). This implies that he had a specific reason. I can think of no other but that he was signposting the message. I need a Tardis!!!
Regards
HS

Not been able to locate WEG's letter to The Times explaining Jack was really doing research that would benefit Humanity.
It'll be somewhere in the posts,possibly not among the press reports.
WEG was on a VIP board/club with someone very close to Jack. Gull.

Reckon Jack had a bolthole away from his family. Cough,cough

Apron possibly ripped from a top corner to a bottom one.
At least one recent thread on whether it had a bib or not

Yep. Red herring.

To be honest that Gladstone letter doesn't ring any bells for me. I'd be interested in reading it. I'll have a nose through the books.
I'm wondering if you think that Gull was the ripper or that the ripper was someone that Gull knew (Clarence?)
Regards
HS

I'd never considered the idea that Eddowes 'could' have dropped it there herself. I'm unsure about that one.

You're right to be unsure about it, and it's safe to rule it out completely. For one thing, the apron piece had blood and fæcal matter on it - where did that come from? (Hint: Eddowes died a bloody death in Mitre Square, part of her intestine was cut out, and there was fæcal matter smeared over the rest of her intestines.) For another, why would she, a desperately poor woman, have cut and thrown away half of her apron in the first place, and why was she still wearing the other half when her body was found in Mitre Square?

You're right to be unsure about it, and it's safe to rule it out completely. For one thing, the apron piece had blood and fæcal matter on it - where did that come from? (Hint: Eddowes died a bloody death in Mitre Square, part of her intestine was cut out, and there was fæcal matter smeared over the rest of her intestines.) For another, why would she, a desperately poor woman, have cut and thrown away half of her apron in the first place, and why was she still wearing the other half when her body was found in Mitre Square?

Couldn't agree more Sam. Jack himself removed the piece of apron and I can't think of any other possible reasons than the ones I mentioned earlier. Have you heard of any alternative explanations ? I have a lot of catching up to do on thought/opinions/research/theories etc. I bet someone's suggested that it was carried from Mitre Square by a dog!?
Regards
HS